Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

    So I've said several times how appreciative I am of West's play this year in multiple threads only to be told by many people West is playing no different this year than he was last year.

    In response I wanted to show a few basic numbers comparing West this year to last. I personally think West, now completely healthy is much better this year. And tho it doesn't completely show in the stats, it's hard for me not to notice a big difference in his play.

    I strongly believe in the idea that matchups are important in the playoffs and one of my problems with West last year is I thought in both playoff series' he had some very favorable matchups which he did not take advantage of. I'm not saying West should average 20 a game in general. But, if you're being defended by Battier and Ryan Anderson you should probably average 20 a game.

    So without further ado, the numbers:

    West's scoring per 36 last year: 15.7, .487%.

    This year it is 18.9, and .492%. While the percentages are about the same, he's obviously scoring at a much better pace. Everyone is saying usage rate is the cause but I disagree. The Pacers offense is pretty open, so if West had the ability to score, he certainly had the opportunities. He just didn't take advantage of them. Far to often, he'd send the ball out for a Danny Granger jumper.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../westda01.html

    When it comes to matchups, this year I see West brutalizing bad defenders, or mismatched defenders which is not something he did last year. He absolutely destroyed Battier this year. This is important because if the Heat in the playoffs are forced to put LBJ on West, this allows our wings much more freedom to score.

    On defense I see a completely different player as well. While West has had his bad games, for the most part, I see him playing very solid defense. Now defense is much harder to measure because there is so much that goes into it, and you depend on your teammates so much. But I like to use 82games.com's stat, opponent PER.

    While it is not perfect obviously, I feel it can be a decent indicator if someone is playing good defense. If an opponent has a very low PER, chances are he didnt play a good game.

    Last season West held opponents to a PER of 14.8 with a eFG% of .485. Not the best marks obviously. This season, West is holding opponents to a PER of 11.7 with an eFG% of .424. Now I don't know if the defensive breakdowns are West's fault and the numbers aren't showing this, but at least I know West's man is not scoring every night. That is at the least pretty decent defense.

    http://www.82games.com/1213/12IND11.HTM
    http://www.82games.com/1112/11IND9.HTM

    So on the whole, this year West is playing better defense and scoring more. Across the board you'll notice in rebounding, scoring, and assists West's numbers are up this year.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../westda01.html

    In short, when I say West is not the same player this year I think there is a lot of evidence that backs that up. Last year I thought West was a liability on defense, and wasn't scoring enough to justify his lack of defense. He's producing on both ends this year.


  • #2
    Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

    Originally posted by mattie View Post
    In short, when I say West is not the same player this year I think there is a lot of evidence that backs that up.
    Here's the stat I use:

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...rder_by=season
    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

      No way is West playing the same as last year. Is that even a question? Must have missed that discussion

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

        The biggest changes I see in West are his overall mobility and the confidence he has in his own body. He will never will be confused with a quick player, but his improved mobility, especially his lateral movement, enables him to be an important contributor to our improved defense.

        Just looking at statistics, West's numbers this season are pretty much in line with his career averages or even the numbers from some of the better years in his career.

        There may be some among us that would like West to be a better player in some aspects of what he provides for us. I think this might be because they just have different things in mind for what they want from a PF. But if there is someone who is not pleased with what West is providing this year compared to last year, or in comparing this year to his career in general, I really don't know what to say. I guess they haven't really been paying attention.... AT ALL!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

          When his percentage is only up half of a percent, but his per36 ppt is up by 4 points, it has to be volume or else it's trips to the foul line.

          That having been said, he looks physically more comfortable out there this year and I would argue he seems more capable on defense this year as well.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

            Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
            When his percentage is only up half of a percent, but his per36 ppt is up by 4 points, it has to be volume or else it's trips to the foul line.

            That having been said, he looks physically more comfortable out there this year and I would argue he seems more capable on defense this year as well.
            he's more aggressive and he's the best late game option on offense
            Smothered Chicken!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

              Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
              When his percentage is only up half of a percent, but his per36 ppt is up by 4 points, it has to be volume or else it's trips to the foul line.
              2012: 10.85 shots per game
              2013: 14.37 shots per game

              2012: 2.67 fts per game
              2013: 4.4 fts per game

              His usage rate is just higher. It accounts for both his increase in fga/fta per game.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

                I looked up West's Assisted Percentage (the % of his field goals that came from an assist from another player). I fully expected it to be down this year to prove that he is scoring in isolation more.

                But I was wrong. 64% of his makes come from assists so far this year, as opposed to 54% from last year. I suspect there is a "Collison Effect" happening here, but I didn't look up the splits.
                The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                RSS Feed
                Subscribe via iTunes

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

                  He's at a different level on both ends, without question. If you can't see that, or you need numbers to see it, I have to question your understanding of basketball.
                  It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

                    He's in much better shape/condition than he was last season. You saw glimpses last season, but he's the total package right now.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

                      I think the combo of the two posts directly above this sums it up.

                      We knew he wasn't 100% last year, coming off the injury. We could see at times how good he was going to be (again), but not consistently.

                      This year, it is rare to think of him as having a game where he doesn't give the team much.

                      And if you (generic you, not any one poster) can't see how much stronger he is, and how that is impacting his game and the team results, then what are you looking at? Maybe you're spending too much time watching the wing players or something. Pick up the binoculars and focus just on watching David for a stretch, especially lately that opening stretch of the second half.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

                        West is the one guy we can just dump the ball into no matter what and expect something good to happen. He won't make the "spectacular" play as often as a guy like George (though i would argue the fade away he makes on a regular basis is pretty nifty) but he makes the right play. He's been a true go-to guy this season, which is one of the reasons that I'm confident in the playoffs moreso than last year. We have a guy that we know is going to get the ball in crunch time and get a shot up, we didn't have that last year necessarily, even though Danny is underrated in the regard.
                        Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

                          I think West's defense looks significantly better at this point. It was West that was giving Wade fits with his dribble the other day. He does this type of thing all the time now and is becoming almost as disruptive at Paul, and that's saying something.

                          However on offense I do think it's DG being out and Roy's FG% that's put more scoring attempts per minutes on West.

                          It's a disservice to what West did last year on offense to brush it off as inferior to this season. The dude was BAMF last year, meaning I was talking him up that way last year. That was because he could put nasty moves on double teams all over the place and showed a massive variety of post-scoring moves. Thus the similar FG%. He was doing these things to people last year and I just think too many people were focused on Roy, Danny and Paul. This year it stands out more (on offense).


                          So better, yes, but primarily on defense. He was already punishing people on offense. Remember that this is why Spoelstra came up with the whole Battier attack on him because he was handing Miami their a**...last year.


                          Danny being out is a huge factor on shot demand. West's lowest FGA game last year was 0-3 in a win vs the Clippers. A WIN. How did he go 0-3 in 20 minutes? DG shot 17 and the Pacers got up big and rode the bench...Barbosa took 10, Tyler took 9, Hill took 7, even Lou took 6. All 4 other starters took more shots than West. They just flat out didn't need him. This was in March.

                          Less than 10 days later he LED THE TEAM in FGAs with 16 in the loss in SAS, a game I was at. He was carrying them for stretches that night even though Danny, Paul, Roy all shot very well.

                          The next night in Houston they gave him the final shot in regulation (classic West high post fade that missed), but for the rest of the 4th he watched Danny, DC, and Roy getting all the touches as they came back from 10 down. Earlier in the game they leaned on him for stretches (start of game, end of 1st half)

                          The theme is consistent for the year, you had DG and you often could count on Roy. Plus DC was a score-first guard even more than Hill is. When Barbosa was in all he did was shoot, and as a key bench guy he often played late in games and took shots if he was on earlier in the game.

                          This team needs more shots from West so he is taking more shots. But the style in which he takes those shots looks identical to me.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 12/13 David West versus 11/12 David West

                            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                            And if you (generic you, not any one poster) can't see how much stronger he is, and how that is impacting his game and the team results, then what are you looking at? Maybe you're spending too much time watching the wing players or something. Pick up the binoculars and focus just on watching David for a stretch, especially lately that opening stretch of the second half.
                            I don't know of anyone who's said that they can't see how much stronger he is. The differeing of opinion revolves around if he's a "different" player. No, he's not different, just better. He's doing everything he did last year, just better.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X